Testseek.fr ont rassemblé 266 examens experts du AMD FX-8350 4.0GHz Socket AM3 Plus et l'estimation moyenne est 79%. Faites descendre l'écran et voyez les toutes les revues pour AMD FX-8350 4.0GHz Socket AM3 Plus.
July 2015
(79%)
266 Avis
Note moyenne issue des avis d’experts sur ce produit.
Utilisateurs
(93%)
2719 Avis
Note moyenne délivrée par les utilisateurs du produit.
790100266
Les éditeurs ont aimé
Progression de performances
Baisse de la consommation
OC
Prix
Performances dans les applications tirant parti de la présence de plusieurs cœurs
Fonction Turbo qui permet de limiter la casse sur les applications ne tirant pas parti de la présence de plusieurs cœurs
Les cartes mères AM+ d'ancienne génération sont co
Coefficient multiplicateur débloqué
Caractéristiques techniques
Ratio perfs/prix intéressant
Les éditeurs n'ont pas aimé
Pas toujours au Top
Conso encore importante
Consommation électrique
Performances dans les applications ne tirant pas parti de la présence de plusieurs cœurs
Performances dans les jeux vidéo toujours en retrait par rapport à la concurrence
Extrait: On June 4 Intel is launching its next generation Core processors, also called Haswell. That means it's the perfect opportunity for us to retest all current processors and a number of older ones with a completely new test configuration. It will not only ...
Cet avis était-il utile?
-
Publié: 2013-04-08, Auteur: James , review by: micromart.co.uk
Extrait: AMD's Piledriver line (which succeeds Bulldozer) has been attempting to pull back ground from Intel since its release, primarily through aggressive discounts. One of the few AMD chips that can even start to compete on performance grounds is this, the eigh...
Extrait: AMD and Intel continue serving up increasingly faster CPUs. But graphics card performance is accelerating even faster. Is there still such a thing as processor-bound gaming? We take two Radeon HD 7970s, high-end desktop CPUs, and a few games to find ou...
Extrait: Earlier this month we looked at the gaming performance in Windows 8 compared to Windows 7 , and it turns out there was no difference. Afterwards our loyal readers asked us to apply our expertise to the processor performance in Windows 8, to find out whe...
Cet avis était-il utile?
-
Publié: 2012-11-08, Auteur: Dave , review by: techradar.com
Good stable overclock, Great multi, treaded performance, Good value for money
Definite clock for clock improvement over Bulldozer, Increased clock speeds whilst keeping the same TDP, Competes against the Intel Core i5 3570K in lots of tasks, Good performance for the money
High power consumption is still an issue, Single threaded performance still needs improvement, 32nm technology, Intel are on 22nm
AMD have certainly raised the game with the revised version of Bulldozer, known now as Piledriver. However, we have not seen the quoted 'up to 23%' improvement which AMD said there should be. Obviously, that is in an ideal world it may be that big of ...
Extrait: The first generation processors based on AMD's Bulldozer architecture did not meet expectations, so AMD is making a second attempt today, with FX 2.0 or Vishera. The Piledriver cores are a refinement and further development of Bulldozer, that are suppos...
Extrait: It is just over a year since AMD launched its flagship consumer CPU. Probably known to you as 'Bulldozer' and brought to market under the performance-intimating FX branding, AMD's grounds-up design, comprised of up to eight cores, generally failed to win ...
Extrait: Last year, AMD launched its Bulldozer architecture to disappointed enthusiasts who were hoping to see the company rise to its former glory. Today, we get an FX processor based on the Piledriver update. Does it give power users something to celebrate? A...
